s10494-023-00404-7

Flow, Turbulence and Combustion (2023) 110:917–944
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10494-023-00404-7
RESEARCH
Large Eddy Simulation of an Inverted Multi‑element Wing

in Ground Effect
James Slaughter1 · David Moxey2 · Spencer Sherwin1
Received: 15 September 2022 / Accepted: 9 February 2023 / Published online: 28 February 2023
© The Author(s) 2023
Abstract
Due to the proprietary nature of modern motorsport and Formula 1, current scientific lit-
erature lacks relevant studies and benchmarks that can be used to understand flow physics
in this area, as well as to test and validate new simulation methodology. With the release of
a new, open-source geometry (the Imperial Front Wing), we present a computational study
of a multi-element aerofoil at a ride height of 0.36h/c and a Reynolds number of 𝟐.𝟐 × 𝟏𝟎𝟓.
A 0.16c slice of the Imperial Front Wing has been examined using high-order spectral/hp
element methods. Time averaged force data is presented, finding lift and drag coefficients
of −8.33 and 0.17 respectively. Unsteady analysis of the force and surface pressure data has
allowed salient feature identification with respect to the transition mechanisms of each ele-
ment. The mainplane and flap laminar separation are studied and the cross-spectral phase
is presented for the lower frequency modes. At St = 40 an in-phase relationship is identi-
fied between mainplane and flap laminar separation bubbles, whilst at St = 60 a distinct
out-of-phase relationship is observed. Wake results, including wake-momentum deficit
and turbulent kinetic energy are presented, which show wake meandering and subsequent
breakdown due to a Kelvin–Helmholtz instability. These results, in particular the transition
mechanisms, will allow for the construction of a dataset to validate novel methods in this
area.
Keywords Large eddy simulation · Motorsports · Aerodynamics · Ground Effect · Spectral/

hp Element Methods
* James Slaughter
j.slaughter19@imperial.ac.uk
David Moxey
david.moxey@kcl.ac.uk
Spencer Sherwin
s.sherwin@imperial.ac.uk
1
Department of Aeronautics, Imperial College London, South Kensington SW7 9AG, UK
2
Department of Engineering, King’s College London, Strand, London WC2R 2LS, UK
13
Vol.:(0123456789)
918 Flow, Turbulence and Combustion (2023) 110:917–944
1 Introduction
Aerodynamic performance is a pivotal aspect of motorsports, with leading racing

classes such as Formula 1 (F1) having average speeds which have increased by a fac-
tor of 1.5 over the pre-aerodynamic era in the 1960’s (Zhang and Zerihan 2003) despite
strict engine architecture and weight restrictions. The major aerodynamic focus has
been the increase of negative lift or downforce, with any increase in downforce posi-
tively impacting performance in any traction limited zone such as braking, cornering,
acceleration, or any combination of these. Whilst downforce has been the major con-
cern, the impact of drag on top speed has been known since the 1920 s (Bettes 1982),
with the power required to overcome drag increasing the with cube of vehicle speed.
Front wings are one of the key aerodynamic elements of a modern F1 car. They are
of major importance, not only shaping overall aerodynamic performance as the front-
most structure of the vehicle, but also in generating 20-30% of the total vehicle load.
Whilst generating one of the more significant loads on vehicle, they are also particularly
sensitive to vehicle attitude (i.e. roll, pitch and yaw), with these factors impacting total
load more disproportionately than other aerodynamic components due to ground effect.
However, front wings in ground effect have been studied to a limited degree in recent
times. A number of experimental (Buscariolo et al. 2019; Roberts et al. 2017, 2016;
Zhang and Zerihan 2003) and numerical (Buscariolo et al. 2019; Lombard 2017) stud-
ies have been conducted, which focus mainly on time-averaged and integral phenomena,
such as forces and mean flow effects including on- and off-surface flows. Furthermore,
investigation into effect of the underlying geometry has been limited, due to the closed
and proprietary nature of modern F1. Consequently, there are only a small number of
case studies and benchmarks, and more complex analysis into flow phenomena, includ-
ing transition and salient unsteady feature identification and analysis, has not been per-
formed. In this work, we aim to overcome this gap through the detailed study of a multi-
element wing in ground effect.
2 Background
2.1 Imperial Front Wing
The Imperial Front Wing (IFW) shown in Fig. 1 was a model given to Imperial Col-
lege London based on an unraced front wing specification of the McLaren MP4-17D.
The IFW is a representative geometry of modern motorsports, and in particular F1 front
wing geometries. With new regulations introduced in 2022 demanding relatively sim-
pler front wings than in previous years, the IFW represents a further opportunity for a
benchmark case that demonstrates salient flow phenomena.
It has been the subject of two experimental campaigns at Imperial College Lon-
don (Buscariolo et al. 2019; Pegrum 2006) and a further two computational cam-
paigns (Buscariolo et al. 2019; Lombard 2017). The experiments of Pegrum (2006) ana-
lysed the ride height and influence of a rotating wheel on the vortex system created by
the outboard section of the geometry. Buscariolo et al. (2019) performed similar inves-
tigations at a normalised ride height of h∕c = 0.36 , in particular comparing high-order
13
Flow, Turbulence and Combustion (2023) 110:917–944 919
Fig. 1 3D CAD model of the Imperial front wing, which comprises a three-wing mulit-element aerofoil,
along with endplates and nosecone section of the car
computational results against their own experimental campaign including planar flows,
surface flow visualisations and computational forces for a number of polynomial orders.
The purpose of this study is to continue to build upon the current literature and expand
upon this growing dataset of results around the IFW. A limiting factor in the current set
of experiments and computational studies is the high-level analysis presented, predomi-
nantly due to the complexity and resolution requirements of these campaigns. The specific
focus of this study is to consider a multi-element wing in ground effect, taken from a cross-
section of the IFW geometry. This will allow the study of aerodynamic properties in far
greater detail, such as identifying and presenting transition classifications, salient flow phe-
nomena and their underpinning mechanisms. This will address a broader gap in the litera-
ture pertaining to the experimental and numerical studies of this area, and will also provide
a part of a highly-resolved benchmark for these configurations. To provide context, this
will be contained within a hierarchical set of benchmarks from the same geometry that will
allow the extensive validation of models against problems of increasing complexity, whilst
still maintaining industrial relevance to motorsports aerodynamics and F1 in particular.
3 Numerical Methods
In this study, and following the approaches of Buscariolo et al. (2019) and Lombard (2017),
implicit large-eddy simulations (iLES) are utilised, where no sub-grid scale (SGS) model
to models the under-resolved turbulent stresses. This is combined with stabilisation meth-
odologies for numerical robustness that will be presented later. We note that although these
play a similar role and are somewhat analogous to a sub-grid scale model, the dissipation
characteristics are not matched to any known phenomena and are a pure characteristic of
the numerical scheme. With iLES, the assumption is that the SGS stresses are of the order
of magnitude as the truncation error of the discretisation. In the sections below, we outline
specifically the discretisation choice in terms of space, and outline the various properties
used in the setup and running of the simulations.
3.1 Spectral/hp Element Methods for Industrial Simulations
Simulations have been performed using the open-source Nektar++ framework presented in
Moxey et al. (2020). Nektar++ utilises a spectral/hp element discretisation, which combine
the geometric flexibility of the finite element method in the ability to represent complex
13
geometries, together with desirable numerical properties, such as the low dissipation and
diffusion that is broadly seen in spectral methods. In this study, since the geometry focuses
on a small cross-section in which the wing can be seen to be homogeneous, we opt to
further select a hybrid Fourier-spectral/hp discretisation (Blackburn and Sherwin 2004),
where two-dimensional planar meshes are used to represent the wing cross-section using
the spectral/hp element method, and the spanwise homogeneous direction is discretised
using a Fourier basis. The incompressible Navier-Stokes solver has been utilised with the
velocity-correction or operator-splitting scheme of Guermond and Shen (2003), allow-
ing the decoupling of pressure and velocity in the momentum equations whilst retaining
higher-order time integration accuracy. A second order in time implicit-explicit time-step-
ping scheme is chosen, which evolves the advection terms explicitly, whilst the diffusion
term is discretised implicitly.
A further advantage of the hybrid discreisation is that it permits solution of many
smaller 2D equations for each plane, rather than a large coupled 3D system. This allows
a wider choice of solution strategies for the underlying matrix systems (Bolis et al. 2016).
In this study, we use a direct solver with multi-level static condensation for the solution of
the discretised system in each plane. Multi-level static condensation reduces the size of the
linear system to be solved by recursively decomposing the global matrix into boundary
and interior nodes. By selecting an optimal ordering of the ndoes, it is possible to promote
block-diagonal matrices that can be trivially inverted by using the Schur complement, sig-
nificantly enhancing computational efficiency (Vos 2011).
3.1.1 Stability Considerations
Unlike traditional applications of the finite element method, where linear shape functions
are used within each element, the spectral/hp element method permits high-order polyno-
mial expansions within an element. For industrial-type simulations, typical polynomial
orders of the range of 3-8 are used, as can be seen from the range of previously success-
fully applied geometries (Hambli et al. 2022; Buscariolo et al. 2019). In selecting the dis-
cretisation orders for the velocity and pressure fields, to ensure the inf-sup condition is
satisfied we employ a Taylor-Hood approach, where the polynomial expansion for velocity
variables is one higher than for pressure (Ferrer et al. 2014). Other sources of instabiity can
arise from aliasing (Mengaldo et al. 2015), owing to the lack of sufficient quadrature order
to resolve either the nonlinearity of the underlying equations, or the higher-order mapping
terms arising from the curved elements that are required to represent the geometry. Stabi-
lisation of aliasing-type errors in under-resolved simulations is also usually required for
industrial simulations.
In previous works, the spectral vanishing viscosity (SVV) method of Tadmor (1989)
has proven to be a robust stabilisation technique to identify and suppress oscillatory effects
observed in higher-order simulations. However, as discussed in Moura et al. (2022), the
use of SVV at lower polynomial orders can be overly diffusive, resulting in a significant
loss in resolution. This disproportionately impacts industrial simulations, which are limited
to lower polynomial orders due to the large resolution requirements needed for complex
geometries. To overcome this, a new approach is proposed in Moura et al. (2022) named
gradient-jump penalisation (GJP), which introduces artificial dissipation through a penalty
term that is based on observed discontinuity of the derivative of the solution fields between
elemental boundaries.
13
A further contribution of this work is that the GJP approach has outperformed the SVV
approach on canonical cases, but has yet to be applied to more complex geometries. For
these studies, the use of a hybrid discretisation means that we employ a hybrid stabilisation
strategy, where GJP is used to stabilise the in-planar flows, and the SVV approach using
the exponential kernel of Karniadakis and Sherwin (2005) is used in the Fourier direction.
The exponential kernel activates purely on expansion modes greater than the product of the
cut-off ratio and the polynomial order.
3.2 Boundary Conditions and Domain
A visualisation of the computational domain can be seen in Fig. 2. The domain is approxi-
mately 39c long, where c refers to the mainplane chord length of 0.25 m. The domain is
designed to accommodate 10c of length upstream of the leading edge, and 28c behind. It
is around 10c in height, resulting in an approximate blockage of 5%. As in previous cases
(Pegrum 2006; Buscariolo et al. 2019; Lombard 2017), a ride height of 0.36h/c has been
chosen, set from the footplate of the full geometry. To construct the wing cross-section, a
slice is taken through the plane defined by Y = 250mm in CAD to create the full geometry.
A spanwise length of Lz = 0.16c has been chosen, the justification for which we outline in
section 3.4.2.
Boundary conditions are also shown in Fig. 2, which are specified fully here for com-
pleteness. Parameters in Nektar++ are nondimensionalised, and thus velocity boundary
conditions are set to a unit value, with the viscosity then being scaled according to the
Reynolds number Re. The following boundary conditions are used:
• Inlet Dirichlet velocity using a freestream condition U = 1.0

• Outlet: A high-order convective boundary condition (Dirichlet) of Dong et al. (2014),
which permits the stable convection of high-energy structures through the outlet.
• Walls (pressure) The Neumann pressure boundary condition of Karniadakis and Orszag
(1991) and Guermond and Shen (2003) is used to ensure the pressure Poisson equation
preserves high-order time integration.
• Wing (velocity) no-slip condition.
• Floor (velocity) Dirichlet condition with value U.
• Floor (velocity) Slip Boundary Condition (Neumann).
Fig. 2 Visualisation of a two-dimesional cross-section of the compuational domatin, including specification

of the boundary conditions
13
3.3 Computational Setup
The case has a Reynolds number Re = 2.2 × 105 based on the mainplane chord length
c. In the spanwise direction, 64 Fourier modes are used to discretise the domain with
periodic boundary conditions imposed by the Fourier discretisation. Polynomial orders
for velocity and pressure of 6 and 5 are used in the current investigation. In combina-
tion with the mesh within each two-dimensional cross-section which we discuss below,
the domain contains 72,580,160 degrees of freedom in total. A non-dimensional time
t∗ = tU∕c based on the far-field velocity U and chord length c. The non-dimensional
time step is then presented as dt∗ =1.6 × 10−6 or 625,000 time steps per convective
length. The solution is allowed to develop for ≈ 40t∗ before averaging and averaging is
conducted over 8t∗.
3.3.1 Initial Conditions
Simulations are started from homogeneous initial conditions, with the velocity com-
ponents (u, v, w), which act in the (x, y, z) directions respectively, set to inlet values of
(u, v, w) = (1.0, 0.0, 0.0), and the pressure set to 0.0 (gauge). Normally-distributed noise
is added to all three velocity directions with mean of 0.0 and variance of 1.0, which is
then scaled by a factor of 0.05.
3.4 Mesh Generation
In the spectral/hp discretisation, accurate representation of the geometry requires the

use of curvilinear high-order meshes, in order to minimise geometric error. The addi-
tional degrees of freedom this introduces means that larger element sizes h should be
used to avoid an unnecessary increase resolution. This process requires a different pipe-
line of mesh generation strategies that most commercial software do not yet provide.
Following the strategy laid out in Mengaldo et al. (2020), we adopt an a posteiori
approach, which converts a coarse, straight-sided linear mesh into a curvilinear high-
order mesh. The linear mesh is generated in Star-CCM+, which is conformal, contains
only triangles and quadrilaterals, and utilises only a single inflation/quadrilateral layer
around relevant surfaces which will be refined in the high-order conversion steps. Three
wake refinement regions are created, which are shown in Fig. 3.
The linear mesh is then processed by NekMesh, the high-order mesh generation util-
ity for the Nektar++ framework. Projection of the CAD boundary information onto
the high-order element is performed, which transforms the mesh from a linear one to
a high-order curvilinear mesh. To achieve this, high-order nodes are inserted on edges,
faces and elemental interiors to deform the mesh to the underlying CAD boundary rep-
resentation. The single prismatic inflation layer is clearly insufficient for simulation pur-
poses; however, the aim of this initial linear element was to allow sufficient room for the
curvature of the grid to be incorporated into the mesh without any self-intersection.
To generate the final boundary layer grid, we split this element using the isoparamet-
ric approach of Moxey et al. (2015), in order to refine the boundary layer to the desired
thickness and distribution. Since the curvilinear element is defined through a mapping
from a reference element to the Cartesian element, we can apply a simple technique
to split the reference element, and then apply the original mapping to yield a refined
13
Fig. 3 Linear mesh generated from Star-CCM+. The lower figure outlines the three wake refinement
regions, with the upper inset visualising the mesh around the wing section
Cartesian element. This permits the generation of a boundary layer to any desired thick-
ness of distribution, which is guaranteed to be valid so long as the original element is
valid.
Layers are typically distributed according to a geometric series. The mesh used in the
current study contains 10 prism layers around the aerofoil elements at a growth rate of
1.4, to resolve both the thin laminar boundary layer and the turbulent boundary layer.
Five layers at the same growth rate are used for the floor pseudo-boundary layer, which
does not require the same degree of resolution due to the lack of a thinner laminar
boundary layer preceding the separation.
3.4.1 Resolution Verification
The mesh resolution is presented in wall-units in Fig. 4, where wall units are
Δ(x+ , y+ , z+ ) = 𝜏 𝜈 and x, y, z refers to the nominal spacing divided by the chosen
u (x,y,z)
polynomial order. In terms of wall resolution, standard guidance that y+ < 1 is typically
adopted for the first cell height when using traditional lower-order discretisations. How-
ever, since we are using higher-order elements, which contain many degrees of freedom
within them, we instead consider the position of the first quadrature point within the
element. These spacings are also only estimates, taken from the Star-CCM+ specified
mesh spacings, and not the explicit arc lengths. Limits presented are those from Geor-
giadis et al. (2010). All x-y planar spacings are smaller than those recommended, apart
from two small sections on the mainplane, at the leading edge and at mid-chord, where
the y+ value is slightly above one.
The spanwise resolution in wall-normal units is not presented due to the use of a
Fourier expansion in the z-direction, although we note that the spanwise resolution is
Lz ∕64 . We do present however a modal energy analysis, to quantify the spanwise resolu-
tion more explicitly. The energy contained in each mode is calculated via the expression
13
(a) Mainplane (b) Flap 1
(c) Flap 2
Fig. 4 Mesh resolution, reported in wall units, for each of the three wing sections
2 ∫Ω k
Ek (t) = ‖û 2 ‖ dx,
1
where û k (x, y) is the k-th Fourier mode represented on 2D cross-sections of the domain.
The modal energy is recorded every 10 time steps. The subsequent discrete time-series
Fig. 5 Distribution of modal energy within each Fourier mode
13
is then averaged at each mode, and is presented in Fig. 5. The energy quickly decays to
10−7, with two decades after the mean mode or mode 0, before hitting the SVV filter-width,
which damps the energy contained within the high-frequency modes. The plot shows the
decay of modal energy with respect to increasing number of modes to a relatively insignifi-
cant level, suggesting that the spanwise resolution is sufficent.
3.4.2 Spanwise width Sensitivity Study
In order to evaluate the effects of selecting a narrow spanwise width, a sensitivity study
has been undertaken with respect to the lift force with increase spanwise length. Several
spanwise lengths were considered ranging from 0.16z/c to 2z/c. Examining the integral
quantities such as lift and drag, shows that these only vary by around 5% across the
spanwise length range.
An auto-correlation study was undertaken to examine the implications of the reduced
spanwise length on the key flow phenomena. Two points A and B were chosen in the
near- and the far-wake, as shown in Fig. 6 with precise locations given in Table 1. Using
the spanwise velocity measured at these locations, auto-correlations are integrated up
until the first zero-crossing for a variety of. Numerically, integrating this measure and
multiplying by the mean velocity gives an estimated integral length-scale, as per the
method in O’Neil et al. (2004). The auto-correlations for Point A at 0.16z/c and 0.5z/c
are presented in Fig. 7 and for Point B in Fig. 8.
Figure 7 shows the auto-correlations at Point A do not change significantly between
both spanwise lengths. In particular, the zero crossing does not change significantly.
However, in contrast, Fig. 8 shows a significant change in the zero crossing between
spanwise lengths.
Using the method described previously, integral length scale are presented in Table 1.
At Point A, as also shown in the auto-correlation plots, limited difference is seen in the
length scale, whereas at Point B, there is a rather marked difference.
This suggests that the force variation is a result of the wake breakdown mechanism in
the farfield. As this is of less interest than the near-wall flows and as these wake break-
down modes are unlikely to exist in reality, the smaller domain of 0.16z/c was chosen
given the perhaps more prevalent industrial relevance.
Fig. 6 Points Locations for Auto-Correlation
13
(a) 0.16z/c
(b) 0.5z/c
Fig. 7 Auto-correlation figures for the spanwise velocity w at Point A for varying spanwise lengths
4 Results
The results of the study are grouped and presented in the following order. Firstly, the aver-
age flow field is presented. Following this, the force coefficients are presented and exam-
ined. The unsteady properties of the force coefficient are investigated and mode identifica-
tion from power-spectral density (PSD) plots of the lift coefficient of each of the aerofoils
is presented. The transition properties are presented through boundary layer profiles, a
mid-plane time-space contour, a cross-spectral phase relationship between the mainplane
and first flap lift coefficients and surface line integral convolution plots. Finally, the wake
structure, meandering, and subsequent breakdown are presented through examination of
vorticity contours, Q-criterion iso-surfaces, wake momentum deficit and line turbulent
kinetic energy.
4.1 Average flow field
Looking closely at the average flow field in Fig. 9, a number of key flow-features can be
seen. Firstly, laminar separation bubbles (LSB) can be seen on the mainplane and the first
flap suctions surfaces. These appear to be extremely thin, due to the thin oncoming laminar
boundary layer. This is a consequence of the higher local Reynolds numbers due to ground
13
(a) 0.16z/c
(b) 0.5z/c
Fig. 8 Auto-correlation figures for the spanwise velocity w at Point B for varying spanwise lengths
Table 1 Length scale estimations Location x position y position Spanwise width Length scale [m]
at auto-correlation points
A −0.405675 0.19452 0.2z/c 0.003597
A −0.405675 0.19452 0.5z/c 0.003555
B 0.242742 0.245322 0.2z/c 0.004423
B 0.242742 0.245322 0.5z/c 0.015197
effect. The floor sees a similar LSB due to the significant expansion aft of the mainplane.
This bubble seems to be significantly larger and thicker than the two on the suction sides
of the first two wing elements. Finally, a similar transition mechanism can be seen on the
pressure side of the upper flap. Similarly to the floor bubble, it is not thinned, and hence is
relatively larger than the others.
Figure 10 shows the average pressure coefficient over each of the elements of the aero-
foil, defined as
p − p∞
Cp = 1
2
𝜌U∞
2
13
Fig. 9 Time-averaged velocity magnitude for the flow field, where white contour lines highlight recircula-
tion regions
Fig. 10 Average pressure coefficient Cp over wing elements
Stagnation pressure is predicted well at the leading edge of each element. A maximum
value of |Cp | occurs on the suction side very close to the leading edge of the mainplane
at Cp ∼ −11. Steep adverse pressure gradients can be seen on the suction side of all ele-
ments with the pressure increase monotonically along the streamwise direction, except for
small regions on the mainplane between 0.46 ≤ x∕c ≤ 0.50. The second flap is seemingly
13
Fig. 11 Average skin friction coefficient Cf plot over wing elements
misaligned to local flow seen by the stagnation points location not at the leading edge. A
subsequent flip in magnitude of Cp aft of the stagnation point is seen on both surfaces.
The skin friction coefficient is further shown in Fig. 11, which is defined by
2𝜏w
Cf =
𝜌U∞
2
where U∞ is the free-stream velocity. The figure shows the evolution of wall shear across
the aerofoils. Firstly, the skin friction is constant over the pressure side of the mainplane
and the first flap, affirming the laminar nature of the pressure side flows. This changes for
the second flap, however, in which a transition can be seen through the significant increase
in wall shear on the pressure side.
The suction surfaces in Fig. 11 highlight that the peak skin-friction coefficient occurs
around the leading edge on all three elements. On the first and second flap, this decreases
to a minimum equivalent to the laminar suction side before steeply increasing, suggesting
a transition mechanism. Again, the second flap is different, where the spike in skin friction
coefficient towards the trailing edge on the suction surface is a lot less significant and the
gradient is far more gradual.
The next series of figures examine the surface line integral convolution (LIC), which
is described in Cabral and Leedom (1993). Across the suction sides of the three wing ele-
ments in Fig. 12, we see additional confirmation and detail further the extent of the LSBs
on the mainplane and the first flap. Two bifurcation lines can be seen on both the main-
plane and first flap, between which are the recirculation regions for the LSB. Critically, no
Fig. 12 Suction side surface line integral convolution of wing elements
13
Fig. 13 Pressure side surface line

integral convolution for flap 2
bifurcation lines are seen on the second flap, suggesting a differing transition mechanism
than on previous elements.
Figure 13 shows a surface LIC of wall shear for the pressure side of the second flap. The
LSB on the pressure side is clearly shown, as it is contained at the leading edge within the
two bifurcation lines, similar to those on the mainplane and first flap suction side bubbles.
This bubble, however, is significantly longer relative to the length of the aerofoil in com-
parison to the suction side bubbles, suggesting the length of the others is impacted through
the adverse pressure gradient, and possibly the interaction with the wake shed from upwind
elements.
Re-examining the Cp plots shown in Fig. 10 confirms this assertion. The LSBs on the
suction side are evident in the pressure distribution on the suction side of both the first and
second flaps. Between 0.45 ≤ x∕c ≤ 0.50 on the mainplane, the Cp distribution flattens and
then sharply increases across the length of the bubble. Whilst this is increasingly obvious
on the mainplane, the first flap is far less prominent than the mainplane. The LSB is also
relatively longer in the case of the first flap, spanning almost the same distance, whilst the
second flap has a significantly shorter element length.
With regards to the suction side of the second flap, no evidence of a LSB is pre-
sent agreeing with the LIC. This points again to a differing transition mechanism on
Fig. 14 Instantaneous contour of

Ui for flap 2
13
Fig. 15 Mainplane suction side wall-normal profiles of the boundary layer
Fig. 16 Power spectrum density for the lift coefficient CL of each wing element
this flap. A type of bypass transition is described in Serdar et al. (2012) called wake
transition, whereby the windward blade’s wake causes bypass transition in the down-
stream blades, where otherwise a differing transition mechanism would be expected.
The instantaneous x-velocity contour shown in Fig. 14 suggests that a similar pro-
cess occurs on the final flap. The wake from the trailing edge shedding, and the shear
layer from the first flap and mainplane, interact with the laminar boundary layer on
the second flap. This causes a bypass-like mechanism, rather than the LSB seen on the
upwind elements.
The boundary layer profiles in Fig. 15 show that the inflection point occurs at
around 0.4x/c. The reversed flow region exists until around 0.5x/c in line with the LIC
plot. The reversed region exists up until y∕c ≈ 0.001 from the wall suggestion, again
showing the extensive thinning caused by the steep adverse pressure gradient.
13
4.2 Force Coefficients
Both time-averaged and unsteady force coefficient results have been examined to fur-
ther investigate the salient flow phenomena. The average lift and drag coefficients are
CL = −8.33 and CD = 0.17 respectively, with forces sampled every 10 timesteps. A similar
interrogation window was used to create PSD visualisations of the CL time series, which is
shown in Fig. 16. These are computed using Welch’s method, outlined in Jwo et al. (2021).
Each PSD, one for each element and one for the summation, has been vertically scaled to
ensure they are visible.
Strikingly, at St = 60 a narrow-band dominant mode exists on all three elements. On
the mainplane, higher narrow-band modes exist at St = 140 and St = 200 which are not as
visible on the other elements. A lower frequency mode at St = 40 on all elements, with this
being most dominant on the first flap. On the second flap a equally dominant mode exists at
St = 30 that does not exist on the other flaps.
4.3 Spectral Analysis
The unsteadiness is now investigated in conjunction with an attempt to identify and pre-
sent mechanisms for several flow features. Firstly, the unsteady properties of the surface
pressure fluctuations are considered. These are sampled after the initial 40t∗ at the linear
mesh locations every 10 timesteps over an averaging period of 8t∗. This allows the exami-
nation not only the average states, but the statistical distributions observed at each station.
Fig. 17 Mainplane and flap 1 suction side pressure fluctuation
13
In Fig. 17, the suction side pressure coefficient Cp is presented, with each point’s interquar-
tile range shown as error bars. In the right-hand side figures, the root mean square (RMS)
of CP , denoted by CP,RMS , is presented to investigate the main areas of pressure fluctuation
across the suction side of both the mainplane and the first flap.
Examining the interquartile range, the variance seems to be greatest within and around
the LSB. Given the sharp increase in skin friction coefficient in the same area, transition to
turbulence in this region is expected aligning with the increase in pressure variance, sug-
gesting generation and/or presence of turbulent kinetic energy in this region. Upwind of
the LSB, the variance seems to be significantly smaller, and downwind of the LSB, some
elevated level of variance persists on the mainplane.
On the flap however, some variance exists upwind of the LSB, suggesting some main-
plane/flap interactions. This could be due to the shedding off the trailing edge or the bound-
ary layer, and subsequent separated shear layer interacting with the flap laminar boundary
layer. Again, similarly to the mainplane, the maxima in interquartile range occurs across
the range of the LSB, and the interquartile range returns to somewhat of an elevated level
aft of it suggesting transition again.
The variation of the RMS of the pressure coefficient plots are also presented in Fig. 17,
√
where CP,RMS
�
= CP − CP . These figures give further fidelity to degree of unsteadiness of
the surface pressure at each particular probe, and the results confirm the previous assertions
that the maximum surface pressure fluctuations occur in the LSB. Using these figures, fur-
ther maxima can be determined: for example, maxima surface pressure fluctuations occur
at around 0.55x/c and 0.61x/c on the mainplane and flap respectively. These locations are
marked by a star and are used and referred to in subsequent sections.
Looking at the PSD of the Cp time histories at these two starred locations on the main-
plane and flap, and by comparing these against the force coefficient PSDs, the relevant flow
features can be identified from the spectra as shown in Fig. 18. In looking at the dominant
spectral peaks, the PSD of the starred location on the mainplane coincides with the peaks
at St = 60, St = 140, and St = 200. This suggests that there is a relationship between these
features and the LSB. Figure 19 shows the comparison between the spectra at the trailing
edge and the lift spectra, which highlights that these spectra peaks do exist at the trailing
edge. Whilst a feedback mechanism between the trailing edge and the LSB is a possibility,
it is less likely due to the lower energy in these frequencies at the trailing edge. Addition-
ally, the instantaneous velocity field around the suction side in Fig. 20 demonstrates that
Fig. 18 Mainplane and flap 1 laminar separation bubble PSDs at starred locations in Fig. 17
13
Fig. 19 Trailing edge pressure spectra comparison with CL spectra
Fig. 20 Instantaneous Ui showing turbulent boundary layer and trailing edge
upstream propagation is the less likely mechanism. However, this could be the source of
any transition instability. Ruling this out would require physical isolation through a split-
ter (or similar device) at the trailing edge, as instability analysis at this Reynolds number
remains infeasible at present.
Whilst the mainplane contains no fluctuations upwind of the LSB, the first flap does.
Therefore, it is not immediately possible to say that these two features are causal. However,
there are no other obvious dominant frequencies other than the ones at St = 60, St = 140
and St = 200, and thus it is reasonable to infer that these are inter-related. The fact that
the frequencies are locked for both LSBs, despite the difference in scale, is something that
warrants further investigation and discussion.
Figure 21 shows the same lift PSD plots on the mainplane and first flap, but also
shows the cross-spectral phase between the two signals. The plot uses a vector of
roughly 35,000 samples long (again sampled every 10 time-steps) using a segment of
13
Fig. 21 Lift PSD and cross-spectral phase comparison of lift signals
16,052 elements. Reduced variance in the provided spectra could be obtained through
a larger time sample (e.g. common to experimental results). However, the results
afforded in Fig. 21 show significant clustering of phase relationships coincident with
the spectral peaks previously observed. Examining the first peak at St = 40 , we see an
Fig. 22 Spatial development of the streamwise u velocity component around the mainplane LSB
13
in-phase relationship between the two signals with a clustering of points around 𝜙 = 0 .
At St = 60 , the more energetic narrow-band feature, a distinct out-of-phase relationship
between the two signals, can be seen due to the clustering of points at 𝜙 ≈ 180.
A mechanism in Serdar et al. (2012) is discussed where LSB vortices occurred from
Kelvin-Helmholtz (K-H) type instabilities causing the shear layer to roll up. These vor-
tices tended to burst and dissipate quickly, releasing and ejecting low momentum flow
away from the surface and into the flow freestream. Figures 22a–c shows this process,
with three contour plots of the instantaneous flow field which are spaced at time inter-
vals of t∗ = 4.16 × 10−5. The subplot visualised in Fig. 22a shows the reattachment of
the LSB and the downstream ejection of the low-momentum flow. The next image in
Fig. 22b shows the stretching of this system in both the wall-normal and wall-tangential
directions. Finally, Fig. 22c shows this flow ejected into the freestream and away from
the wall.
The impacts of this phenomenon can be further seen in the time-space contour
presented in Fig. 23. A cut of the aerofoil is taken at the mid-plane at z = Lz ∕2 . His-
tory points are taken at each of the linear mesh locations and are sampled every 10
time steps. These are then discretised and interpolated onto a regular grid of size
Npoints × Ntimesteps and displayed as the contour shown. The transition location is visible,
with quasi-periodic streaky structures emanating from this region towards the trailing
edge. Whilst not continuously regular, these streaks do seem to be of similar wavelength
and period when they do occur - suggesting some regularity.
Figures 24 and 25 shows a similar technique, investigating the CP,RMS then using key
points to investigate within the frequency domain. However, with the second flap the
pressure surface is investigated. In comparison, the pressure fluctuation is a lot more
consistent over the element with three defined peaks at the leading edge, the transition
location at x∕c ≈ 0.35 and the trailing edge. PSDs at each of these locations are pre-
sented, shown by coloured stars, with the colour corresponding to the PSD in Fig. 25.
Fig. 23 Space-time contour of the mainplane midplane pressure coefficient Cp, where time proceeds left-to-
right and space bottom-to-top
13
Fig. 24 Flap 2 pressure coefficient and CP,RMS

′
Fig. 25 Flap 2 pressure side PSD at starred locations from Fig. 24
Figure 25 shows the St = 60, St = 140, and St = 200 peaks exist in each of the three series
at each location. These series are vertically shifted to allow for ease of visualisation. The trail-
ing edge location, however, shows the presence of the feature at St = 30, suggesting that it
could be related to the trailing edge shedding. The feature at St = 40, however, cannot be seen
on these plots. Further investigation could look for the location to determine the maximum
energy within that frequency bin, which could help to identify this feature.
13
Fig. 26 a Velocity magnitude U b Streamwise vorticity 𝜔x c Spanwise vorticity 𝜔z . Instantaneous midplane
contours of the flow field
4.4 The Wake
Figure 26a shows an instantaneous velocity magnitude contour on the mid-plane. The
wake is clearly visible, with the most significant velocity deficit visible above the main-
plane and behind the first flap. The wake extends downstream, before meandering about
1c downstream of the second flap, before breaking up a few chords downstream. The
wake from the floor pseudo-boundary layer is also visible, with the shear layer growing
13
Fig. 27 (a) View of the farfield and wake (b) View of the mainplane suction surface. Isocontours of instan-
taenous Q-criterion for the value of Q = 100
along the length of the floor. No clearly visible interactions between the floor boundary
layer and the wake are visible within the a few chords downstream.
Streamwise and spanwise vorticity contours are presented in Fig. 26b, c respec-
tively. The streamwise vorticity is relatively well mixed and homogeneous across the
near wake. About 1.5c downstream of the trailing edge instability is obvious from the
Kelvin-Helmholtz type shedding and meandering of the wake.
Isosurfaces of Q-criterion with value of Q = 100 are shown in Fig. 27a and b. Fig-
ure 27a shows the detail of the wake, where the wake meandering is clearly visible
downstream. The isosurface also details the LSB on the upper surface of the second flap
with no visible transition on the pressure surfaces of the mainplane and first flap. The
mainplane view of the Q criterion isosurfaces in Fig. 27b details the LSB mechanism.
A spanwise homogenous K-H mode propagates from the start of the LSB, before break-
ing down very quickly into turbulence. The exact method of breakdown of these 2D
structures is unclear, though further discussion is presented in following sections. From
previous theory, LSBs are amplifiers of other instabilities and mechanisms, such as K-H
13
(a) x/c = 2 (b) x/c = 2.5
(c) x/c = 4 (d) x/c = 6

Fig. 28 a x∕c = 2 B x∕c = 2.5 C x∕c = 4 D x∕c = 6. Wake momentum deficit and URMS
′
at stations
x∕c = 2, 2.5, 4, 6
rollup in the shear layer around the edge of the recirculation region, which often leads to
transition in these cases (Serdar et al. 2012).
The wake momentum deficit plots at stations of x∕c = 2, 2.5, 4, 6 are presented in
Fig. 28. The results are overlaid with error bars corresponding to the interquartile range.
The wake in the x∕c = 2 plot appears stratified, with more unsteadiness in the bottom por-
tion of the wake, and in the upper section of the wake a stair-step exists. The shear layer on
the floor only exhibits a 15% velocity deficit over less than 0.07c in height at this station.
Moving downstream at x∕c = 2.5, the wake appears more uniform, but still has larger
variance in the velocity magnitude on the lower portion of the wake than the upper. The
wake has shifted upwards relative to the x∕c = 2 station and the shear layer on the floor has
thickened in comparison to the upstream location.
The further downstream stations at x∕c = 4 and x∕c = 6 show significant unsteadi-
ness and mixing in the middle and upper portion of the wake at both stations. The wake
at x∕c = 4 is lower than both its upwind and downwind neighbours respectively. The
velocity deficit in the floor shear layer looks similar for all stations; however, the inter-
quartile range has significantly increased in comparison to the upwind station. Outside
13
(a) x/c = 2 (b) x/c = 2.5
(c) x/c = 4 (d) x/c = 6

Fig. 29 a x∕c = 2 b x∕c = 2.5 c x∕c = 4 d x∕c = 6. Wake turbulent kinetic energy at the same stations
x∕c = 2, 2.5, 4, 6 as in Fig. 28
of the wake, the velocity has returned to freestream values in comparison to the near-
field, which had significant acceleration in the lower portion of the wake. Minimal dif-
ferences, other than the location of the peak velocity change, can be found between
x∕c = 4 and x∕c = 6.
Visualisation of turbulent kinetic energy (TKE) defined as k = 12 (u� + v� + w� ) are
presented in Fig. 29 at the same stations as the wake momentum deficit of Fig. 28,
where TKE is half the sum of the variances of the velocity components. From the near-
field stations in Fig. 29a and 29b, it is clear to see a wake with 3 distinct peaks and
layers in k in the wake at y∕c = 0.75, y∕c = 0.8, and y∕c = 1.0 , corresponding to the
separate wakes of each of the 3 wing elements. In Fig. 29b, the peak TKE in the wake is
at a similar location and value.
In the farfield at x∕c = 4 , the wake and turbulence are more thoroughly mixed with
no significant layers existing or visible in the TKE profile. There is generally a lower
amount of TKE in this region with a maximum value of k = 0.008, in comparison to the
value of k = 0.012 found at the x∕c = 2.5 station. However, the wake is wider than in
previous stations, and the floor shear layer continues to dissipate in comparison to the
near field.
At x∕c = 6 , the K-H mode must generate significant turbulent kinetic energy. This is
highlighted by the maximum value of TKE being 50% larger than recorded 2c upstream,
13
and is closer to the levels in the near-field. The wake has moved vertically by a sig-
nificant amount compared against the previous station, and is far wider than even in the
near-field. This is most likely a result of the meandering of the wake due to the K–H
mode.
5 Conclusions
This study presents a study on a multi-element wing in ground effect using a spectral/hp
element method. We present average pressure coefficient Cp plots, force data both time-
averaged, unsteady and spectral analysis. The time-averaged force coefficients are −8.33
and 0.17 for lift and drag respectively. Spectral peaks were found at St = 40, St = 60,
St = 140 and St = 200 on all flaps, with the St = 140 mode being significantly less visible
on the second flap. Mode identification was undertaken, with these spectral peaks likely
corresponding to modes associated with the LSB. However, a lower frequency mode at
St = 30 exists only on the second flap which likely corresponds to the LSB on the pressure
surface.
Secondary effects, including the ejection of lower momentum flow into the freestream,
have been discussed and presented through contour plots, along with isosurfaces of Q-cri-
terion and a time-space contour at the midplane of the mainplane that details the primary
transition mechanism on the mainplane in fair detail. Through the cross-spectral phase,
the phase relationship at St = 40 and St = 60 were shown, with the St = 40 mode show-
ing an in-phase relationship, whilst the St = 60 mode shows an out-of-phase relationship.
Although initial phase relationships were found, further investigations into the coupling of
these mechanisms could be undertaken and would be of interest for future studies.
The wake structure has been discussed and presented through isosurfaces of Q-criterion,
streamwise and spanwise vorticity contours, wake momentum deficit and turbulent kinetic
energy line plots at various near- and far-field stations. The wake appears to be stratified
in the near-field, with three distinct zones. In particular, this can be seen in the visualisa-
tion of the turbulent kinetic energy, where three distinct local maxima are present. Moving
further downstream, this wake mixes through a primary K-H type instability that causes the
wake to meander and eventually break down.
The results presented are the initial findings for the creation of a benchmark dataset,
which can act as the calibration of lower fidelity models with respect to transition mecha-
nisms, as well as for near-wall flows relevant to motorsport and F1, with a particular focus
on downforce-producing elements in ground effect. The final uploaded dataset will con-
tain more specific data required for this, and will be useful for the calibration of novel
methodologies and reduced order models. Field data, such as time- and spatially-averaged
velocities, first-order statistics such as turbulent kinetic energy and vorticity will also be
presented in full.
Finally, the mesh and session (setup) files, a restart field, and the utilised version of the
code will be provided, to allow for researchers to repeat and extend these results in the
future.
Acknowledgements The authors acknowledge the efforts of Julien Hoessler and Francesco Bottone, who
provided the CAD geometries as well as provided advice and assistance during the duration of these studies.
This work primarily used the ARCHER2 UK National Supercomputing Service (https://www.archer2.ac.
uk). This work was supported by the Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council [EP/R029326/1].
Some calculations were performed using the CSD3 Tier 2 HPC platform hosted by the University of
Cambridge.
13
Author Contributions James Slaughter ran the simulations, prepared the data and wrote the first draft.
David Moxey, Spencer Sherwin are responsible for the code development, editing and supervision of James
Slaughter. All authors have read and agreed to the final version.
Declarations
Conflict of interest The authors declare no pertinent conflict of interests related to this work or its publica-
tion.
Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License,
which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long
as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Com-
mons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article
are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the
material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not
permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly
from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
References
Bettes, W.H.: The aerodynamic drag of road vehicles past, present, and future. Eng. Sci. 45, 4–10 (1982)
Blackburn, H.M., Sherwin, S.J.: Formulation of a galerkin spectral element-fourier method for three-dimen-
sional incompressible flows in cylindrical geometries. J. Computat. Phys. 197(2), 759–778 (2004).
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcp.2004.02.013
Bolis, A., Cantwell, C.D., Moxey, D., Serson, D., Sherwin, S.J.: An adaptable parallel algorithm for the
direct numerical simulation of incompressible turbulent flows using a Fourier spectral/hp element
method and MPI virtual topologies. Comput. Phys. Commun. 206, 17–25 (2016). https://doi.org/10.
1016/j.cpc.2016.04.011
Buscariolo, F.F., Hoessler, J., Moxey, D., Jassim, A., Gouder, K., Basley, J., Murai, Y., Assi, G.R.S., Sher-
win, S.J.: 9. Spectral/hp element simulation of flow past a formula one front wing: validation against
experiments (2019)
Cabral, B., Leedom, L. Imaging vector fields using line integral convolution. Proceedings of the 20th annual
conference on Computer graphics and interactive techniques: 263–270 (1993). https://doi.org/10.1145/
166117.166151
Dong, S., Karniadakis, G.E., Chryssostomidis, C.: A robust and accurate outflow boundary condition for
incompressible flow simulations on severely-truncated unbounded domains. J. Comput. Phys. 261,
83–105 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcp.2013.12.042
Ferrer, E., Moxey, D., Sherwin, S.J., Willden, R.H.J.: Stability of projection methods for incompressible
flows using high order pressure-velocity pairs of same degree: Continuous and Discontinuous Galer-
kin formulations. Commun. Comp. Phys. 16(3), 817–840 (2014). https://doi.org/10.4208/cicp.290114.
170414a
Georgiadis, N.J., Rizzetta, D.P., Fureby, C.: Large-eddy simulation: current capabilities, recommended prac-
tices, and future research. AIAA J. 48, 1772–1784 (2010). https://doi.org/10.2514/1.J050232
Guermond, J.L., Shen, J.: Velocity-correction projection methods for incompressible flows. SIAM J. Num.
Anal. 41, 112–134 (2003). https://doi.org/10.1137/S0036142901395400
Hambli, W., Slaughter, J., Buscariolo, F., Sherwin, S.: Extension of spectral/hp element methods towards
robust large-eddy simulation of industrial automotive geometries. Fluids (2022). https://doi.org/10.
3390/fluids
Jwo, D.J., Chang, W.Y., Wu, I.H.: Windowing techniques, the welch method for improvement of power
spectrum estimation. Comput. Mater. Continua 67, 3983–4003 (2021). https://doi.org/10.32604/cmc.
2021.014752
Karniadakis, G., Sherwin, S. 6. Spectral/hp Element Methods for Computational Fluid Dynamics. Oxford
University Press (2005)
Karniadakis, G.E., Orszag, S.A.: High-order splitting methods for the incompressible navier-stokes equa-
tions. J. Comput. Phys. 97, 414443 (1991)
Lombard, J.E.W.: A high-fidelity spectral/hp element LES study of Formula 1 front-wing and exposed
wheel aerodynamics. Ph. D. thesis, Imperial College London (2017)
13
Mengaldo, G., de Grazia, D., Moxey, D., Vincent, P.E., Sherwin, S.J.: Dealiasing techniques for high-order
spectral element methods on regular and irregular grids. J. Comput. Phys. 299, 56–81 (2015). https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.jcp.2015.06.032
Mengaldo, G., Moxey, D., Turner, M., Moura, R.C., Jassim, A., Taylor, M., Peiro, J., Sherwin, S.J.: Indus-
try-relevant implicit large-eddy simulation of a high-performance road car via spectral/hp element
methods. SIAM Rev. 63, 723 (2019)
Moura, R.C., Cassinelli, A., da Silva, A.F., Burman, E., Sherwin, S.J.: Gradient jump penalty stabilisation
of spectral/hp element discretisation for under-resolved turbulence simulations. Comput. Methods
Appl. Mech. Eng. (2022). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cma.2021.114200
Moxey, D., Cantwell, C.D., Bao, Y.: Nektar++: Enhancing the capability and application of high-fidelity
spectral/hp element methods. Comput. Phys. Commun. 249, 107110 (2020). https://doi.org/10.17632/
9drxd9d8nx.1
Moxey, D., Green, M.D., Sherwin, S.J., Peiró, J.: An isoparametric approach to high-order curvilinear
boundary-layer meshing. Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Eng. 283, 636–650 (2015). https://doi.org/10.
1016/j.cma.2014.09.019
O’Neil, P., Nicolaides, D., Honnery, D., Soria, J.: Autocorrelation functions and the determination of inte-
gral length with reference to experimental and numerical data. 15th Australasian Fluid Mechanics
Conference (2004)
Pegrum, J.M.: Experimental Study of the Vortex System Generated by a Formula 1 Front Wing. Ph. D. the-
sis, Imperial College London (2006)
Roberts, L.S., Correia, J., Finnis, M.V., Knowles, K.: Aerodynamic characteristics of a wing-and-flap con-
figuration in ground effect and yaw. Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part D:
Journal of Automobile Engineering 230, 841–854 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1177/0954407015596274
Roberts, L.S., Finnis, M.V., Knowles, K. (2017) Forcing boundary-layer transition on a single-element wing
in ground effect. Journal of Fluids Engineering, Transactions of the ASME. Journal of Fluids Engi-
neering. https://doi.org/10.1115/1.4037036
Serdar, M., Karasu, lyas, Hakan, H., Turul, M.: Low reynolds number flows and transition. Low Reynolds
Number Aerodynamics and Transition (2012). https://doi.org/10.5772/31131
Tadmor, E.: Convergence of spectral methods for nonlinear conservation laws. SIAM Journal of Numerical
Analysis 26, 30–44 (1989)
Vos, P.: From h to p efficiently: optimising the implementation of spectral/hp element methods. Ph. D. thesis
(2011)
Zhang, X., Zerihan, J.: Aerodynamics of a double-element wing in ground effect. AIAA Journal 41, (2003)
13

s10494-023-00404-7

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

You might also like

s10494-023-00404-7

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

s10494-023-00404-7

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Flow, Turbulence and Combustion (2023) 110:917–944

Large Eddy Simulation of an Inverted Multi‑element Wing

James Slaughter1 · David Moxey2 · Spencer Sherwin1

Keywords Large eddy simulation · Motorsports · Aerodynamics · Ground Effect · Spectral/

Aerodynamic performance is a pivotal aspect of motorsports, with leading racing

2.1 Imperial Front Wing

3.1 Spectral/hp Element Methods for Industrial Simulations

3.2 Boundary Conditions and Domain

• Inlet Dirichlet velocity using a freestream condition U = 1.0

Fig. 2 Visualisation of a two-dimesional cross-section of the compuational domatin, including specification

In the spectral/hp discretisation, accurate representation of the geometry requires the

(a) Mainplane (b) Flap 1

Fig. 5 Distribution of modal energy within each Fourier mode

3.4.2 Spanwise width Sensitivity Study

Fig. 6 Points Locations for Auto-Correlation

4.1 Average flow field

Fig. 10 Average pressure coefficient Cp over wing elements

Fig. 11 Average skin friction coefficient Cf plot over wing elements

Fig. 12 Suction side surface line integral convolution of wing elements

Fig. 13 Pressure side surface line

Fig. 14 Instantaneous contour of

Fig. 15 Mainplane suction side wall-normal profiles of the boundary layer

Fig. 17 Mainplane and flap 1 suction side pressure fluctuation

Fig. 19 Trailing edge pressure spectra comparison with CL spectra

Fig. 20 Instantaneous Ui showing turbulent boundary layer and trailing edge

Fig. 21 Lift PSD and cross-spectral phase comparison of lift signals

Fig. 24 Flap 2 pressure coefficient and CP,RMS

Fig. 25 Flap 2 pressure side PSD at starred locations from Fig. 24

(a) x/c = 2 (b) x/c = 2.5

(c) x/c = 4 (d) x/c = 6

(a) x/c = 2 (b) x/c = 2.5

(c) x/c = 4 (d) x/c = 6

You might also like

2.1 Imperial Front Wing

3.1 Spectral/hp Element Methods for Industrial Simulations

3.2 Boundary Conditions and Domain

3.4.2 Spanwise width Sensitivity Study

4.1 Average flow field